Current Affairs 2024 POTUS race

[dylsexicbleu]

Right, I'm not saying either is preferable.
I'm just pointing out that the republicans stacked the supreme court already and the dems just sit back and do nothing.
Hard to win against a party with zero morals.

Fair enough, keep convincing yourself one side is moral and the other isn't. I personally stopped believing the world was goodies versus baddies at about 12 years of age. There may be one side I root for over the other, but no way do I believe my side are morally better. I think one side may have marginally better ideas or ideals, but morally my side is as bad as yours. And your side is freaking bad.

 

[Ruairi77]

Fair enough, keep convincing yourself one side is moral and the other isn't. I personally stopped believing the world was goodies versus baddies at about 12 years of age. There may be one side I root for over the other, but no way do I believe my side are morally better. I think one side may have marginally better ideas or ideals, but morally my side is as bad as yours. And your side is freaking bad.

I'm unregistered. not really a fan of either party.
But the GOP are in the gutter and not looking at the stars.

 

[dylsexicbleu]

I'm unregistered. not really a fan of either party.
But the GOP are in the gutter and not looking at the stars.

Fair enough, but I'll take this with a pinch of salt. You just liked a comment calling for the assassination of Donald Trump. In today's US political climate such language is concerning. But hey, you're on the side looking at the stars...

 

[TN Toffee]

You're arguing partisan politicians do partisan things. You won't get any disagreement from me on that point.

Statehood for DC possibly ends the Republic too. You are simply packing the Senate this time instead of packing SCOTUS.

Seems a bit partisan to think giving an unrepresented segment of American citizens representation in Congress would “end the Republic”.

And while I don’t agree that expanding the Supreme Court be the end of it either, I generally agree with you that going down that road is a slippery slope that probably wouldn’t end well for either side. I think the most realistic improvement that could be made there is to impose term-limits, and get them on a rotating cycle where one would be appointed in each Presidential term. Would probably require some sort of overhaul of the confirmation process as well to ensure that none of the nonsense that McConnell pulled off at the end of Obama’s second term would be possible.

Something needs to be done about the Senate…as this chart helps point out. It might have almost made sense in a bygone era when the two sides were attempting to negotiate and compromise in good faith. However, in the current climate where the side with the outsized power is using it purely to be obstructionist at any, and every turn, it needs to be reformed.

 

[Ruairi77]

Fair enough, but I'll take this with a pinch of salt. You just liked a comment calling for the assassination of Donald Trump. In today's US political climate such language is concerning. But hey, you're on the side looking at the stars...

I didnt like it, I laughed at it, as he was clearly joking.
The right wing, zero craic since 1775!

 

[Noisy noise annoys]

A moral issue? So, if my lifestyle or political beliefs aren't approved by, say, Eminem I'm morally wrong to play his music? I dislike the views and lifestyles of many artists, it doesn't stop me enjoying their output. Heck, if right wing pols were limited to using only music approved by the artists all you'd hear at right wing events was the music of Ted Nugent, Alice Cooper and some Christian rock. No thanks. Rally's are about energy, any relevant music outweighs the 'feels' of the creative artist.

No. iIt is just wrong - for both parties. I mean, just get your own sounds or some from an artist that agrees with your choices. It actually makes a mockery of the whole rally if you cannot even find artists whose music is suitable and appeals to your people.

And yes, morally also

 

[Noisy noise annoys]

Fair enough, but I'll take this with a pinch of salt. You just liked a comment calling for the assassination of Donald Trump. In today's US political climate such language is concerning. But hey, you're on the side looking at the stars...

Assassination is a bit far perhaps but, I will celebrate his death when it comes along with Putin and Netanyahu

 

[dylsexicbleu]

Seems a bit partisan to think giving an unrepresented segment of American citizens representation in Congress would “end the Republic”.

And while I don’t agree that expanding the Supreme Court be the end of it either, I generally agree with you that going down that road is a slippery slope that probably wouldn’t end well for either side. I think the most realistic improvement that could be made there is to impose term-limits, and get them on a rotating cycle where one would be appointed in each Presidential term. Would probably require some sort of overhaul of the confirmation process as well to ensure that none of the nonsense that McConnell pulled off at the end of Obama’s second term would be possible.

Something needs to be done about the Senate…as this chart helps point out. It might have almost made sense in a bygone era when the two sides were attempting to negotiate and compromise in good faith. However, in the current climate where the side with the outsized power is using it purely to be obstructionist at any, and every turn, it needs to be reformed.
View attachment 247941

Thanks for the informative and considered reply. However, that single Wyoming voter being overly represented is precisely why the US is held together as a Federation of States. If this wasn't the case individual states would be completely overrun by the Federal Government(if they aren't already) or larger states. This was all part of the original Constitutional Convention. It gives small states some power in a system they otherwise would be powerless in. Of course there is a way to minimise much of this, take power away from Washington and back to individual states. Dems won't countenance this of course.

 

[Ruairi77]

Fair enough, but I'll take this with a pinch of salt. You just liked a comment calling for the assassination of Donald Trump. In today's US political climate such language is concerning. But hey, you're on the side looking at the stars...

Just on the side that's not in the gutter.
But hey, you keep idolizing your hero who slept with a porn star weeks after his wife gave birth to their first kid, who dodged the draft, who robbed from his own childrens charity, who raped and slandered at least one woman, likely more, who managed to bankrupt a casino, profited off the presidency, pardoned his corrupt buddies, licked putins boots, all this on top of being one of the stupidest people alive.

Still no one likes to admit they've been conned and half the people out there are dumber than the Average American.

 

[dylsexicbleu]

I didnt like it, I laughed at it, as he was clearly joking.
The right wing, zero craic since 1775!

I'm sure I'd be treated with similar light hearted joviality had I suggested the assassination of a Dem pol. Heck, I'm even censoring myself from naming a name in case of a ban, or getting placed on an intelligence service watchlist.

 

[Ruairi77]

Seems a bit partisan to think giving an unrepresented segment of American citizens representation in Congress would “end the Republic”.

And while I don’t agree that expanding the Supreme Court be the end of it either, I generally agree with you that going down that road is a slippery slope that probably wouldn’t end well for either side. I think the most realistic improvement that could be made there is to impose term-limits, and get them on a rotating cycle where one would be appointed in each Presidential term. Would probably require some sort of overhaul of the confirmation process as well to ensure that none of the nonsense that McConnell pulled off at the end of Obama’s second term would be possible.

Something needs to be done about the Senate…as this chart helps point out. It might have almost made sense in a bygone era when the two sides were attempting to negotiate and compromise in good faith. However, in the current climate where the side with the outsized power is using it purely to be obstructionist at any, and every turn, it needs to be reformed.
View attachment 247941

Yup, I agree with all of this,
the only thing I'd say is that McConnell already pointed the country down that slippery road and got no push back from Republicans who seem content with this kind of politics. Right or wrong, the dems dont. I was just pointing to options if they decided not to take the moral high road.

And since McConnell refused to even hear Garland, the GOP have gone from bad to worse in terms of what they'll do to gain/keep power.

 

[Ruairi77]

I'm sure I'd be treated with similar light hearted joviality had I suggested the assassination of a Dem pol. Heck, I'm even censoring myself from naming a name in case of a ban, or getting placed on an intelligence service watchlist.

zero craic, painfully boring!

Also the humor in the post wasn't trump being shot, it was the potential irony of what he's leaning on Scotus to pass.

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

 

[dylsexicbleu]

zero craic, painfully boring!

Also the humor in the post wasn't trump being shot, it was the potential irony of what he's leaning on Scotus to pass.

What's Presidential immunity from prosecution got to do with assassinating Trump? What's ironic about it? Please, explain it to me as if I'm Joe Biden.

 

[Kurt.]

I don’t hide the fact I’d be buzzing if Trump fell out of a plane at 30,000 feet